Running Head: ZIMBARDO & MILIGRAM

Zimbardo, Miligram & Ethics Jedediah Steen Excelsior College

Running Head: ZIMBARDO & MILIGRAM

Zimbardo, Miligram & Ethics

1. If you were the experimenter in charge, would you have done this study? Would you have terminated it earlier? Would you have conducted a follow-up study? Why or why not? If I was the experimenter in charge, I would have done this study. (This is assuming I did not know the things I know about it now, of course.) I believe that understanding how prison systems affect humanity/society is extremely important, and a research experiment like this could garner a wealth of information. Unlike Zimbardo, however, I would not have made myself so personally involved (playing the role of a prison superintendent). Impartialness, un-biasness, and objectivity are essential for research results to be valid. By maintaining my distance from the experiment, I would have definitely ended it earlier! Causing such psychological and physical harm to volunteers is an ethical line that should not be crossed. As I read about the experiment, my first thought (concerning ethics) was that I would have a third party monitor the experiment once a day to voice any concerns. As I got near the end of the slideshow, however, it is clear that this method may not have worked since out of 60 visitors, only one Dr. Christina Maslach, voiced a strong opposition to the experiment. If my experiment ended earlier than the 6 short days of the real one I would likely not have done a follow-up experiment. I would have tried a different research method to gather my data. 2. If you were a guard, what type of guard would you have become? How sure are you? If I was chosen to be one of the guards I would stand up for to the other guards and ensure that things are done the right way. That is, ethically and systematically. Similar to raising a young child, you have to lay out clear rules and clear consequences, then enforce them. There is no need to treat people inhumanely to accomplish that goal. If any of the other guards did not want to do things the right way, then I would probably resort to psychological tactics, such as making them feel like they are not accepted by the rest of the group until they conform. I would hate to do that, but if their actions are unethical I would have to take control and that is the best method I know of. I am 100% sure that that is the type of guard I would be. I believe that when people are given power, and a lack of significant consequences exist (as did in this experiment), then their true colors show. As weve seen from the results of this study, some guards chose the good role, while others chose to play bad guard. The post-research interview between a prisoner and a guard he hated seems to show a hint at the guards true nature as well when the prisoner says, I know youre a good person. To that the guard replies, You dont know that. To me, that is a possible indication that, deep down inside, the guard enjoyed treating people that way; it was just his true colors showing. 3. If you were a prisoner, would you have been able to endure the experience? What would you have done differently than the actual subjects did? For instance, if you were imprisoned in a real prison for five years or more, could you take it?

Running Head: ZIMBARDO & MILIGRAM

If I were a prisoner, then yes I believe I could have endured it. I was in the military for 6 years, and boot camp is a similar type of experience (only much longer, but less physically abusive). That sort of conditioning would make it much easier for me than a typical college student. I would likely have conformed to whatever the rules were, until ethical lines were crossed. When I view something as wrong and unnecessary, I cant help but do something about it! At that point, I would have likely tried to unite the other prisoners, state very specifically what was unnecessary and why to the good guards to get them on my side, then try to use that leverage to turn the ones that were on the fence to our side, then finally confront the abusive guards. I would stop at nothing until the specific abusive treatment was halted. Its just not in my nature to give up. I understand that the prisoner who joined during the middle of the project rebelled and put in solitary for several hours and the guards turned the other prisoners on him. However, I understand team dynamics well and I think I could have played the situation more in my favor. If I was placed in a real prison for 5 years I believe I could take it. Im small in stature, but good at working with all types of people. I would do my best to be a neutral party in a prison system. Just call me Switzerland. 4. How do the ethical dilemmas in this research compare with the ethical issues raised by Stanley Milgram's obedience experiments? Would it be better if these studies had never been done? Was it right to trade the suffering experienced by participants for the knowledge gained by the research? Although both crossed ethical lines, I believe Zimbardos experiment was worse. Milgrams participants didnt experience any real physical pain, but Zimbardos participants were humiliated and mentally and physically hurt. Milgrams volunteers were unseen, only heard, but Zimbardos prisoners had direct contact with their abusers (perhaps magnifying the damage). I feel that these studies were important, but could have been done differently to avoid crossing ethical lines. Ive outlined (above) how I would have done the Zimbardo experiment. Im not sure how Milgrams could have been done differently though. I dont think it was right to trade the participants suffering for the knowledge gained. 5. Ethics are a fundamental concern of sociologists when they are conducting research. Check out some of the policies that govern sociological research. Go to the National Institute of Health (NIH) site at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/hs/index.htm to see the NIH regulations for conducting research on human subjects. Now look at the Code of Ethics of the American Sociological Association (ASA) at http://www.asanet.org/about/ethics.cfm. How are the NIH principles similar to those of the ASA? How are they different? Is there anything else you would like to see added? The ethical guidelines for the NIH and ASA are both very similar. Both require that work be done in a professional manner, and that the subjects well-being always be placed first. Both require respect for peoples rights, dignity, diversity and humanity. And both require accountability to their respective professional/scientific communities. (That seems to act like a checks and balance system for both areas). The ASAs guidelines, however, seem much less detailed and more open to interpretation. The NIH provides some very specific lines and examples. If someone else repeats something like the Zimbardo experiment, then more detailed guidelines may be necessary for the ASA.

Running Head: ZIMBARDO & MILIGRAM References American Sociological Association: Ethics and the Code of Ethics. (n.d.). American Sociological Association: . Retrieved May 20, 2012, from http://www.asanet.org/about/ethics.cfm American Sociological Association: Ethics and the Code of Ethics. (n.d.). American Sociological Association: . Retrieved May 20, 2012, from http://www.asanet.org/about/ethics.cfm Henslin, J. M. (2011). Life in society: readings to accompany Sociology, a down-to-earth approach, tenth edition (4th ed.). Boston: Pearson/Allyn & Bacon. The Stanford Prison Experiment: A Simulation Study of the Psychology of Imprisonment. (n.d.). The Stanford Prison Experiment: A Simulation Study of the Psychology of Imprisonment. Retrieved May 20, 2012, from http://www.prisonexp.org/psychology/38